Legal Question in Personal Injury in California

Re: Pain and Suffering in Small Claims court???

"Pain and suffering" refers to physical pain, which is not what your son has endured. Instead, he has endured emotional distress.

Mr. Lupoff says that you need to sue for negligent infliction of emotional distress, but he is wrong. California recognizes actions for *intentional* infliction of emotional distress but not for negligent infliction. However, it does recognize claims for ordinary negligence and allows the plaintiff to recover damages for emotional distress if it was the foreseeable result of the underlying negligence. The result is the same as it would be if you could sue for negligent infliction.

I haven't dealt with this type of situation and have not done any research for this response, but I believe emotional distress damages are available when the plaintiff has seen a family member injured or killed but not when he has seen the same thing happen to a stranger -- a fellow human being -- let alone seen harm done to material things or to animals (at least those with which the plaintiff was unfamilar).

The question here is whether the court would treat your cat as a family member or as any other animal or property. There may be case law which answers this question, but if there is I don't know what it says. The law does not always regard pets as mere property, but it does sometimes and I don't know which type of case yours will turn out to be.

Keep in mind that you can only sue the dogs' owners once for this incident. It sounds like you want to bring one suit for the financial costs of the attack and another for the emotional trauma to your son, but it doesn't work that way. And if you bring your one lawsuit in the small claims court, your *total* damages will be limited to $5,000. You seem to think you can recover $5,000 just for your son't trauma (assuming, of course, that such damages are available and that the trauma was serious enough to justify such a sum), but if your financial costs add up to, say, $2,000 there will only be $3,000 left over to cover the emotional distress.

Your damages include the value of your cat but I believe the value is defined as its value to you and not what it would have sold for in the open market. People routinely buy and sell cats for $50 or less, but even if yours would only have fetched such a price you should be able to get much more than this in damages.

You should probably pay for a brief consultation with a lawyer before you decide how to proceed. If you decide to sue in small claims court you won't be able to opt for a higher court later, and I'd hate to see you under-value your case if it turns out that the available damages are a lot more than you think.

Re: Pain and Suffering in Small Claims court???

The proper cause of action would be, Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress. You should get your child to a psyche doctor. He could be suffering from post traumatic stress syndrome. This matter may be worth more than a small claims court verdict of $5K. Feel free to contact my office at, 818.943.0462 for a free consultation.

Re: Pain and Suffering in Small Claims court???

Generally speaking, the law in California classifies animals as chattel or personal property. The usual standard for assessing the amount of monetary compensation for lost or damaged property is the item's value at the time of destruction

A litigant may not seek negligent infliction of emotional distress damages as a result of damage to chattel or personal property.

Re: Pain and Suffering in Small Claims court???

Sorry about your cat, and your kid. But with all due respect to attorney Lupoff, I think negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress is a stretch. If you prevail on this theory, I plan to sign up every kid who ever watched "The Itchy And Scratchy Show."